1. Field of Invention
Embodiments of this invention relate to complex concave deltahedral polyhedral structures formed of the multiple use of a basic rigid stellate modular structure. The basic stellate module is made of joined non-rectilinear polygons, joined at coincident base edges of each of the polygons. The multiple basic modules are joined to each other along the additional remaining side edges of the non-rectilinear polygons. A family of diverse concave polyhedrons is taught, many structures very different in form one from another. The non-rectilinear polygons within a basic module are rigidly formed in stellate orientations with various different appropriate angles of attitude of the several polygons one to another within a basic module being possible. First, at least two multiple basic stellate modules are joined together. Then the continued joining together of additional basic modules along their non-base edges to the first two basic modules joined, progressively triangulates, rigidifies, strengthens and progressively completes the form of a complex concave rigid polyhedron.
In particular embodiments of this invention relate to complex concave polyhedral frameworks, specifically to such rigid frameworks having discrete, different forms and surfaces being formed and defined at the exterior and at the interior of the frameworks or on either side of a substantially polyhedral framework model, which are formed of rigidly fixed and stellately joined non-rectilinear polygons. The basic teaching of the present invention is a rigid stellate geometric module formed of joined non-rectilinear polygons which acts as a repetitively used building block, which when used with others of like kind forms previously unknown complex concave polyhedral models having different discrete triangulated rigid structures at the interior and the exterior of the models.
2. Description of Prior Art
Many different modular structures made from linear struts forming rigid frameworks are known in the prior art. Each solves a particular problem, for example, ease of erection, or of manufacturing from a simpler or more cost effective module.
In some applications, for example, a small manufacturer, or a building program requiring maximum diversity from a minimum inventory or in the trusses for space stations in outer space, a very simply assembled system having a limited number of parts is needed to produce a rigid structure. Such prior art structural systems contain the following number of disadvantages:
(a) In the prior art, for a given framework system its linear struts and connectors can only form a limited number of discrete framework structures. To achieve a different final framework or a variety of final frameworks, different initial struts and framework subassemblies are required.
(b) In some cases complex and costly connector modules, known in the art as nodes have been taught as required to achieve a versatile amount of diversity for a single framework system. In the prior art, any attempt to achieve a very complex and diverse number of different structural arrays of frameworks from the same modular structural system has not been possible without supplying a number of costly additional connectors, or complex connectors having many different apertures or recesses in the same node to recieve the placement of a linear strut in order to orient variously a given geometrical framework.
(c) In attempting solutions to these problems of diversity and variety, the prior art has relied on either clever ways to unfold or erect frameworks, or provided complex specialized shapes of connectors and struts, in essence, attempting streamlining and simplifying ways to achieve known structures through the formation of complex and costly new modules. Obviously, this is a disparity and a contradiction; if, uniform low-cost ends are desired but high- tech methods are employed.
(d) The frameworks achieved by the prior art were always previously known geometric polyhedral frameworks, similar to known space frames and other known frames of the prior art. They were more costly and complex in order to achieve some diversity, but finally achieved only preexisting known geometric forms, and failed to teach any new polyhedral forms from those known in the prior geometric art.
(e) In addition, the framework systems which achieved some diversity in the prior art, which were not traditional known space frame systems were thin section shell-like structures with the interior structure merely being the underside of the same structural elements at the exterior of the structure, or thin substantially planar frames, being only one structural member deep, without substantial depth of stiffening, such as geodesic domes or similar lightweight structures, and therefore not able to resist substantially large imposed loads. Also these thin-shelled structures being only exterior structures, contained no integral devices to achieve the formation of differentiation of interior space for usefulness.
(f) The prior art then contained no frameworks systems which were extremely diverse from a minimal device and also able to resist large imposed loads from both the exterior and the interior of the framework. In general, geodesic domes have traditional rectilinear structures used at their interiors, which are not joined to the exterior frame. Traditional spaceframes, and thin shells, because of their high cost and due to the complexity of the form of their nodes and struts and labor intensiveness required are used in only limited ways in building construction, for example as a featured design element only.
(g) Therefore these prior art innovations, were never able to teach a very simple module made from simple and known parts, and a few number of parts, which nonetheless formed new, innovative frameworks of a great diverse variety of types of frameworks all made from the same few simple linear structural elements. Nor have prior art frameworks formed from simple structural modules ever been able to teach new concave polyhedral frameworks of new geometries never before known, and which might have a diversity of applications in varying, different required situations, and might resist large loads, and have easily differentiated interior spaces.
Nor have prior art frameworks formed from simple structural modules making a great diversity of different geometric models, been able to achieve both rigid interior and exterior structures which were structurally integral to each other but each of discrete separate form, not being the same structural elements at the exterior and the interior of the polyhedrons.
(h) Other more traditional modular building systems of the prior art often utilize rectilinear building forms as the end product of the construction process, even if some triangulation is also used in the subassemblies used to achieve the final forms. These rectilinear forms are inherently not very rigid and therefore require additional stiffening which must be added to the rectilinear forms to achieve adequate rigidity.